Irish property developer Patrick McKillen has lost a High Court battle with
Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay over the ownership of three of London’s
most famous hotels.

Mr Justice Richards said Sir David and Sir Frederick had not breached any of Mr McKillen’s pre-emption rights when building a stake in Coroin, the parent of the £1bn Maybourne hotel group – the owner of Claridge’s, The Connaught and The Berkeley.

Mr McKillen, who controls 36.2pc of Coroin, faces a legal bill of up to £15m should he be ordered to pay full costs.

Sir David and Sir Frederick own 28.36pc of Coroin.

The dispute centred on actions taken by Sir David and Sir Frederick, owners of Telegraph Media Group – parent company of The Daily Telegraph – in first buying equity stakes in Coroin and then acquiring £660m of the hotel company’s debt last year from Ireland’s National Asset Management Agency.

Mr McKillen alleged he was frozen out of the deals contrary to shareholder agreements drawn up when the hotels were acquired.

Related Articles

The judge found Sir David and Sir Frederick, who also own London’s Ritz hotel, had acted lawfully and properly in their dealings concerning Maybourne. He found that Mr McKillen’s shareholder rights were not prejudiced and there was no conspiracy of any kind against Mr McKillen.

The judge said: “The overall conclusion is that Mr McKillen’s petition and claim fail and will be dismissed.”

Richard Faber, speaking on behalf of Sir David and Sir Frederick, said: “After 30 days in court the judge has looked in detail at every aspect of Mr McKillen’s case, and has found it to be without any merit.

“It should never have been necessary for the Barclay interests to defend these baseless proceedings, which we always believed were an attempt by Mr McKillen to tarnish the Barclay interests’ reputation in the misconceived hope that they would then sell out to him.

“The High Court has now confirmed what we always knew to be the case: that the Barclay family and its interests have always behaved entirely lawfully and properly in their business dealings.”

A statement on behalf of Mr McKillen said he was “disappointed” with the judgment and is “considering” options in relation to an appeal.